I was doing postgresql streaming replication, which was fine when two
machine in the same datecenter. but recently I was planning to deploy
new slave at a different datecent, the latency between the master and
slave is 20ms;
below is the related configurateion:
Both master and slave have below conf
e:
> On Jul 23, 2011, at 6:50 AM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>
>> what does invalid record length and invalid magic number normally
>> means? xlog corrupted?
>> Thanks for any further help!
>
> It means your build settings for pg are not compatible across the 2 machines.
> Fo
mas Vondra wrote:
>> On 23 Červenec 2011, 18:14, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>>> thanks for the help!
>>> are there any other possible reasons?
>>>
>>> both system are using Debian amd64, as uname -a shows:
>>> Linux washington 2.6.26-2-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 9
less postgres didn't showing anything... cause it's binary, I tried with -a
less postgres |grep -a ELF
less postgres | grep -a Class
nothing related to (ELF32 => 32bit, ELF64 => 64bit).
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 1:55 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 23 Červenec 2011, 18:1
the system date formats? looks the same:
master:
#date
Sat Jul 23 21:53:34 CDT 2011
slave:
#date
Sat Jul 23 21:52:56 CDT 2011
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 2:44 AM, Scott Marlowe wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
>> On 23 Červenec 2011, 18:14, Yan Chu
o disk, so when postgresql started it was seeing corrupted
files?
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Scott Ribe
wrote:
> On Jul 23, 2011, at 8:43 PM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>
>> I used apt-get to install postgresql, running pg_config showing they
>> are exactly the same...
>
>
at 8:43 PM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>
>> I used apt-get to install postgresql, running pg_config showing they
>> are exactly the same...
>
> BTW, forgot to mention this in my first message: I run streaming replication
> across the country with latency well over 100ms and no pr
checkpoint_segments = 64
wal_keep_segments = 128
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 24 Červenec 2011, 6:09, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>> thanks for all the help!
>>
>> @Adrian: yes, only one instance on each machine
>>
>> not the slave fin
-24 10:56:11 CDT 2011-07-24 10:56:11 CDT @ LOG: invalid
magic number in log file 87, segment 107, offset 4849664
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
> checkpoint_segments = 64
> wal_keep_segments = 128
>
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Tomas Vondra wro
fter I complete sync data and
start slave. If I stop slave later and restart, yes it could show
xlog not found and can not catch master. but why the "invalid" things
in the first place?
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:28 AM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> Dne 24.7.2011 14:46, Yan Chunlu napsa
9.0.4-1+b1
additional facilities for PostgreSQL
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Fujii Masao wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:56 AM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>> I think the problem is still "invalid record length" and "invalid
>> magic number", it start show
sorry for the typo, "debian and apt-get"
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 5:39 PM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
> I am using debian and apt-get to install postgresql, dpkg list shows
> they are the same? is there anyway to tell what's version it is
> compiled from? thanks!
>
> M
gcc compiler on my machine is 4.6.1, but I didn't compile it myself.
just installed the binary from apt-get. I will try to compile it by
myself to see what will happen
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 8:18 PM, Tomas Vondra wrote:
> On 25 Červenec 2011, 11:39, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>> I am us
hot-stanby server? seems master is okay.
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:06 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Tomas Vondra" writes:
>> On 25 Červenec 2011, 11:39, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>>> I am using debian ant apt-get to install postgresql, dpkg list shows
>>> they are the
is okay? then I could
compile my own version with 4.6.1
but how about the data? from the bug information, the data file seems
not compatible
I need to do pg_dump and pg_restore? what a nightmare.
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yan Chunlu writes:
>>
how about 4.3.2?
I have gcc 4.3.2 compiled postgresql 9.0.4 as slave, is that okay
that I turn the slave into master? so the switch will be a lot more
smooth.
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 12:08 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Yan Chunlu writes:
>> oh god...thanks a lot for the tip. I did actually
I tried several times to visit the site recently but the domain always
can not be resolved. is there something wrong?
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
thanks! working now
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 3:54 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 07/27/11 12:48 AM, John R Pierce wrote:
>>
>> ...hopefully its reserved...
>
> errr. i meant to type RESOLVED. hah.
>
> --
> john r pierce N 37, W 122
> santa cruz ca
I would like to implement two master db with even-odd id sharding. in
mysql it is fairly easy by using the configuration:
auto_increment_offset = 1
auto_increment_increment = 2
but I have searched a lot didn't find anything related to this, some users
doing this via trigger like "rubyrep".
is
b way but it seems they only choice for me, the delay within
several minutes is acceptable.
On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 5:12 PM, John R Pierce wrote:
> On 11/15/11 12:56 AM, Bèrto ëd Sèra wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>>
>> On 15 November 2011 11:44, Yan Chunlu > springri...
recently I have found several tables has exactly the same pkey, here is
the definition:
"diggcontent_data_account_pkey" PRIMARY KEY, btree (thing_id, key)
the data is like this:
159292 | funnypics_link_point | 41
| num
159292 | funnypics_link_point | 40
| num
I am using pgpool's replication feature, it does copy pg_xlog from one
server to another, was that possible cause of the problem?
thanks for the help!
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Edson Richter wrote:
>
> Em 17-11-2011 03:19, Yan Chunlu escreveu:
>
> recently I have fou
seems they are identical:
159292 | |funnypicscn_link_karma|
159292 | |funnypicscn_link_karma|
On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 4:07 PM, Szymon Guz wrote:
>
>
> On 17 November 2011 06:19, Yan Chunlu wrote:
>
>> recently I have found several tables has exactly the same pke
wrote:
> Em 17-11-2011 09:21, Yan Chunlu escreveu:
>
> I am using pgpool's replication feature, it does copy pg_xlog from one
> server to another, was that possible cause of the problem?
>
>
> I did not mean that this IS your problem, I just gave you a tip regarding
>
nique constraint "account_pkey"
does that means one duplicate record will prevent all other records to
import?
On Mon, Nov 21, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On Monday, November 21, 2011 6:39:55 am Yan Chunlu wrote:
> > got it. thank you very much for you help. I fo
I just tried several times to make sure I didn't do anything wrong.
I use
pg_dump -U postgres -E UTF8 -F c -b -v -a dbcontent -f data.backup
then
pg_restore -a -d dbcontent data.backup
to restore a db, and the data dir's size on the source machine is
56GB, after I restored data on the target
never mind. just found I changed the wal_keep_segments to 5000, it's
the size of pg_xlog dir who used a lot of space.
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 10:18 PM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
> I just tried several times to make sure I didn't do anything wrong.
>
> I use
> pg_dump -U postgre
I am using COPY public.table_name FROM STDIN to import data. it is
very efficient, but if there's any duplicate key exists, the whole
procedure has been stopped. is there anyway to around this?
why does not postgresql just give a warning and continue the copy?
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailin
thanks a lot!
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:19 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On Sunday, December 18, 2011 10:54:21 pm Yan Chunlu wrote:
> > I am using COPY public.table_name FROM STDIN to import data. it is
> > very efficient, but if there's any duplicate key exists, the whole
&g
I am transforming a db with millions records to anther schema. for
some reason I need to select the records using IN (xx,xx).
the ids in the IN was about 1000 recored every time, but I found the
query was getting slow while the selection moving on.
the shared buffer is 2048M. and the cpu and i
nd: (thing_id = ANY
('{164438,112478,102941,112377,164442,181764,104028}'::bigint[]))
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
> I am transforming a db with millions records to anther schema. for
> some reason I need to select the records using IN (xx,xx).
>
> the i
seems similar to this problem:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5198380/improving-postgres-psycopg2-query-performance-for-python-to-the-same-level-of-ja
but no solution yet.
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 5:00 PM, Yan Chunlu wrote:
> I also tried explain but found nothing special:
>
> expla
32 matches
Mail list logo
